[10955] in Commercialization & Privatization of the Internet
Re: California NAP Designed as a CIX Killer??
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Gordon Cook)
Tue Mar 15 23:52:40 1994
From: cook@path.net (Gordon Cook)
Date: Wed, 16 Mar 1994 04:52:05 GMT
In-Reply-To: hwb@upeksa.sdsc.edu (Hans-Werner Braun)
To: hwb@upeksa.sdsc.edu
Cc: com-priv@psi.com, cook@pandora.sf.ca.us
A reasonable reply Hans Werner, and while I support the CIX, I'd never
try to pretend that the CIX doesn't have problems of its own.
Still the situation seems to me likely to get more complex not less and
I think it will be interesting to see how traffic will be bridged
between these two camps.
I suppose a CIX member who connected to the NAP would be required to
carry traffic back from that part of the network to CIX members who
choose not to connect?? If this is a correct supposition, it seems to
me likely to place a further strain on the differences between some CIX
members.
For example if PSI and UUNET do not join NAPs, do those CIX members who
do bear the burden of carrying the portion of commercial traffic
from these companies to the NAP abiding part of the ameican internet??
There will surely be some regionals who are CIX members who may find
themselves in such a position. I think they will be very unhappy.
Am I missing anything??
